Connect with us

Features

Democrat concerns about Biden’s candidacy deepens

Published

on

Project 2025 – Ominous mandate for Republican agenda

by Vijaya Chandrasoma

Two weeks have passed since the disastrous CNN debate on June 27, and the news cycle has been consumed with the controversy whether Biden should stay in the race for the presidency or whether his dismal performance was not a sign of a more serious malaise.

At least 17 Democratic Congressmen and one Senator (and counting, just about every hour), have called on him publicly to withdraw. There are many more private murmurings that it would be best if he does hand over the torch to a younger, more electable candidate. Even Speaker Pelosi sent a carefully worded, lukewarm statement about Biden’s chances in November. There are rumors that Pelosi and President Obama have been meeting privately to discuss this problem. After all, the basis of Biden’s run for the Presidency in 2020 was that he would be a one-term president to defeat Trump and provide a bridge to the leadership of the younger generation of the Party.

Another hit came last Wednesday, when Hollywood idol, George Clooney, who recently participated with President Obama and other celebrities in a star-studded Biden fund raiser which raised over $30 million, released an op-ed in the New York Times, urging the Democratic Party to choose a new nominee, after Biden’s dismal debate performance. The fact that even major Democratic donors like Clooney are falling off the cliff indicates that the Party will run into serious financial problems ere long.

Urging Democratic lawmakers not to wait and see if the dam breaks, Clooney says, “The dam has broken. We can put our heads in the sand and pray for a miracle in November, or we can speak the truth…. We are not going to win in November with this president. On top of that, we won’t win the House, and we’re going to lose the Senate. This isn’t only my opinion; it is the opinion of every senator and congress member and governor I’ve spoken with in private”.

Clooney’s comments were devastating. Mainly because they were true; there is little doubt that many more donors will follow his lead. Significantly, Clooney gave President Obama a heads-up before he submitted the op-ed to the New York Times. Sources familiar with the exchange say that while Obama did not encourage Clooney to write what he did, neither did he object to it.

Even those who support Biden in a public show of loyalty are known to have a sneaking lack of private enthusiasm. Many have expressed fears, confirmed by current polls, that Trump will win re-election handily in November, and the Republicans will also gain control of the House and the Senate. With the Supreme Court completely suppliant to the conservative cause, the Trumpian Party will reign totalitarian supreme for the foreseeable future.

This whole argument of whether to change the course of Democratic leadership seems to be a waste of valuable time, with the election just under four months away. The Democrats must concentrate on one objective only, that of keeping Donald Trump, who will destroy the democracy of the nation, away from the White House. As Senator Bernie Sanders said. “What we are talking about now is not a Grammy contest song for the best singer. Biden is old. He’s not as articulate as he once was. I wish he can jump up the stairs of Air Force One, but he can’t. What we have to focus now is on policy; whose policies have benefited, and will benefit, the vast majority of the people of this country”.

After the debacle of the debate, the short-term aim for the Democratic Party was to remove the indelible impression of an old man, unable to articulate two very simple messages. One, the remarkable achievements of the first term of his presidency, which transformed a failing, criminally mismanaged Trump first term on the cusp of recession to the most robust economy in the world today – a record of bipartisan legislative achievements unparalleled in recent history. Two, the existential danger that another Trump presidency will threaten the democracy and the rule of law of the nation.

What President Biden must emphasize is the obvious. That he is old. He is not the man he once was. He did have a terrible night during the debate where he made these facts painfully obvious to an audience of 51 million viewers, a spectacle of frailty, perhaps worse, which can never be unseen.

But Biden must remind the American voters of the temporary amnesia they seem to be suffering about how they fared during the four years of Trump’s first term. How he gave a tax cut of over $1 trillion which benefited mainly the super-wealthy and the corporations; how he mishandled the handling of the Covid pandemic, ignoring the advice of the greatest scientists in the world, which caused the avoidable deaths nearly a million Americans and tanked the economy to near recession; how he incited an insurrection that nearly brought down a democratically elected government; how he stole top-secret government documents to trade with the nation’s adversaries; the list is endless.

Trump’s mind has become exponentially unhinged, with outrageous comments in his campaign rants, the latest being the explanation of his energy policy at a recent rally in Las Vegas, where he argued that he would prefer being electrocuted in a boat powered by an electric battery rather than being eaten by some imaginary shark! In truth, so would I.

Biden gave a relatively energetic campaign rally speech in Raleigh, North Carolina the day after the disappointing debate, where he acknowledged that he was not a young man, but stated that his record and character prove that he’s still the man for the job. He also made a forceful speech at the 75th Anniversary of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Alliance in Washington DC, quoting Reagan, “If our fellow democracies are not secure, we cannot be secure. If you are threatened, we are threatened. And if you are not at peace, we cannot be at peace….”Reagan knew it then, and we know it now. Our nations will continue to keep faith with what we’ve pledged in the years to come”.

However, NATO leaders present at the meeting, are petrified at the prospect of the re-election of Donald Trump, who threatened to leave the Alliance during his first term, and has made no secret of his deep admiration for Russian strongman, Putin. They appeared to be distressed at how much more frail and aged Biden seemed, just a month after the G7 meeting in Italy.

Both the North Carolina and NATO were strong Biden speeches, with no gaffes, but they were both scripted and made with the use of teleprompters, which did little to achieve what was intended: to convince us that the presidential debate was a one-off disaster. He did make a mistake when he introduced President Zelensky at the end of the NATO conference as President Putin, but he caught himself within seconds and made a joke of it.

Thursday’s crucial press conference went off relatively well for President Biden. He made a scripted 20 minutes speech about the success of the recently concluded NATO Anniversary celebrations, and listed the reasons why he is the best person to defeat Donald Trump in November; stressing that “I am the most qualified to run for this job. I am not in this for my legacy. I am in this to finish the job I started”. He articulated clearly his grasp of the economic and societal problems facing the country, and certainly spoke like a different person than the man we saw at the presidential debate.

He then invited questions from the international press. He faced nearly an hour of probing questions, but started off badly right at the top. When asked about the qualifications of Vice-President Harris to do the job, he said, “Look, I wouldn’t have picked Vice-President Trump (!) if I were not sure she could do the job”. But he answered questions about his policies if he wins a second term in remarkable detail, especially questions on foreign policy, which were right in his wheelhouse. But for a couple of minor errors, mistaking names which, as every octogenarian will tell you, is a constant problem, he did as well as could be expected.

But the issues that have plagued him and caused all the doubts about a second term which make for his low poll ratings, and cause doubts among his Democratic colleagues, remained unchanged. He is too old, he is too frail, he is failing in cognitive acuity and physical health. And these problems will only keep getting worse with the passage of time.

The Heritage Foundation, the conservative think-tank with deep ties to the Republican Party, especially its Trumpian incarnation, released a 922-page document titled “Project 2025”, which outlines the far-right Republican agenda which the federal government will carry out immediately after Trump wins re-election. Project 2025 is authored by numerous officials of Trump’s first term, with contributions from conservative organizations intent on transforming the nation into a Christian white autocracy.

According to the website of the project, “It is not enough for conservatives to win elections. If we are to rescue the country from the grip of the radical Left, we need both a governing agenda and the right people in place, ready to carry this agenda out on Day One of the next conservative administration. This is the goal of the 2025 Presidential Transition Project”.

As The New Republic notes, “Project 2025 is a remarkably detailed guide to turning the United States to a fascists’ paradise….a Christian nationalist nation of the United States, one in which married heterosexuality is the only valid form of sexual expression and identity, all pregnancies would be carried to term, even if that requires coercion or death, and transgender and gender-nonconforming people do not exist”. And 90% of the poor and the immigrants, especially those from shithole countries, exist only to serve the wealthy, white 10%.

In a post on his Truth Social platform last week, Donald Trump attempted to distance himself from the extreme agenda of Project 2025. Although, if he had the ability to read, the text of the document, a carbon copy of his plans for America’s radical right, Christian white future, would have rewarded him with a wet dream of enormous pleasure.

The Republican National Committee Convention starts tomorrow in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, during the course of which Trump will be gloriously anointed as the Party nominee for the monarchy, as the presidency has recently been defined by the US Supreme Court. Trump will also likely announce his running mate next week, who will be selected on the basis of their answers to two vital questions:

Will you faithfully follow every command of His Republican Highness?

Will you agree to be hanged if you don’t?

So with four months to go, American voters are faced with the most important decision the nation has been threatened with in 250+ years.

We can only pray for one, even two more viable alternatives. Sure can’t do worse.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

The call for review of reforms in education: discussion continues …

Published

on

PM Harini Amarasuriya

The hype around educational reforms has abated slightly, but the scandal of the reforms persists. And in saying scandal, I don’t mean the error of judgement surrounding a misprinted link of an online dating site in a Grade 6 English language text book. While that fiasco took on a nasty, undeserved attack on the Minister of Education and Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya, fundamental concerns with the reforms have surfaced since then and need urgent discussion and a mechanism for further analysis and action. Members of Kuppi have been writing on the reforms the past few months, drawing attention to the deeply troubling aspects of the reforms. Just last week, a statement, initiated by Kuppi, and signed by 94 state university teachers, was released to the public, drawing attention to the fundamental problems underlining the reforms https://island.lk/general-educational-reforms-to-what-purpose-a-statement-by-state-university-teachers/. While the furore over the misspelled and misplaced reference and online link raged in the public domain, there were also many who welcomed the reforms, seeing in the package, a way out of the bottle neck that exists today in our educational system, as regards how achievement is measured and the way the highly competitive system has not helped to serve a population divided by social class, gendered functions and diversities in talent and inclinations. However, the reforms need to be scrutinised as to whether they truly address these concerns or move education in a progressive direction aimed at access and equity, as claimed by the state machinery and the Minister… And the answer is a resounding No.

The statement by 94 university teachers deplores the high handed manner in which the reforms were hastily formulated, and without public consultation. It underlines the problems with the substance of the reforms, particularly in the areas of the structure of education, and the content of the text books. The problem lies at the very outset of the reforms, with the conceptual framework. While the stated conceptualisation sounds fancifully democratic, inclusive, grounded and, simultaneously, sensitive, the detail of the reforms-structure itself shows up a scandalous disconnect between the concept and the structural features of the reforms. This disconnect is most glaring in the way the secondary school programme, in the main, the junior and senior secondary school Phase I, is structured; secondly, the disconnect is also apparent in the pedagogic areas, particularly in the content of the text books. The key players of the “Reforms” have weaponised certain seemingly progressive catch phrases like learner- or student-centred education, digital learning systems, and ideas like moving away from exams and text-heavy education, in popularising it in a bid to win the consent of the public. Launching the reforms at a school recently, Dr. Amarasuriya says, and I cite the state-owned broadside Daily News here, “The reforms focus on a student-centered, practical learning approach to replace the current heavily exam-oriented system, beginning with Grade One in 2026 (https://www.facebook.com/reel/1866339250940490). In an address to the public on September 29, 2025, Dr. Amarasuriya sings the praises of digital transformation and the use of AI-platforms in facilitating education (https://www.facebook.com/share/v/14UvTrkbkwW/), and more recently in a slightly modified tone (https://www.dailymirror.lk/breaking-news/PM-pledges-safe-tech-driven-digital-education-for-Sri-Lankan-children/108-331699).

The idea of learner- or student-centric education has been there for long. It comes from the thinking of Paulo Freire, Ivan Illyich and many other educational reformers, globally. Freire, in particular, talks of learner-centred education (he does not use the term), as transformative, transformative of the learner’s and teacher’s thinking: an active and situated learning process that transforms the relations inhering in the situation itself. Lev Vygotsky, the well-known linguist and educator, is a fore runner in promoting collaborative work. But in his thought, collaborative work, which he termed the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is processual and not goal-oriented, the way teamwork is understood in our pedagogical frameworks; marks, assignments and projects. In his pedagogy, a well-trained teacher, who has substantial knowledge of the subject, is a must. Good text books are important. But I have seen Vygotsky’s idea of ZPD being appropriated to mean teamwork where students sit around and carry out a task already determined for them in quantifying terms. For Vygotsky, the classroom is a transformative, collaborative place.

But in our neo liberal times, learner-centredness has become quick fix to address the ills of a (still existing) hierarchical classroom. What it has actually achieved is reduce teachers to the status of being mere cogs in a machine designed elsewhere: imitative, non-thinking followers of some empty words and guide lines. Over the years, this learner-centred approach has served to destroy teachers’ independence and agency in designing and trying out different pedagogical methods for themselves and their classrooms, make input in the formulation of the curriculum, and create a space for critical thinking in the classroom.

Thus, when Dr. Amarasuriya says that our system should not be over reliant on text books, I have to disagree with her (https://www.newsfirst.lk/2026/01/29/education-reform-to-end-textbook-tyranny ). The issue is not with over reliance, but with the inability to produce well formulated text books. And we are now privy to what this easy dismissal of text books has led us into – the rabbit hole of badly formulated, misinformed content. I quote from the statement of the 94 university teachers to illustrate my point.

“The textbooks for the Grade 6 modules . . . . contain rampant typographical errors and include (some undeclared) AI-generated content, including images that seem distant from the student experience. Some textbooks contain incorrect or misleading information. The Global Studies textbook associates specific facial features, hair colour, and skin colour, with particular countries and regions, and refers to Indigenous peoples in offensive terms long rejected by these communities (e.g. “Pygmies”, “Eskimos”). Nigerians are portrayed as poor/agricultural and with no electricity. The Entrepreneurship and Financial Literacy textbook introduces students to “world famous entrepreneurs”, mostly men, and equates success with business acumen. Such content contradicts the policy’s stated commitment to “values of equity, inclusivity and social justice” (p. 9). Is this the kind of content we want in our textbooks?”

Where structure is concerned, it is astounding to note that the number of subjects has increased from the previous number, while the duration of a single period has considerably reduced. This is markedly noticeable in the fact that only 30 hours are allocated for mathematics and first language at the junior secondary level, per term. The reduced emphasis on social sciences and humanities is another matter of grave concern. We have seen how TV channels and YouTube videos are churning out questionable and unsubstantiated material on the humanities. In my experience, when humanities and social sciences are not properly taught, and not taught by trained teachers, students, who will have no other recourse for related knowledge, will rely on material from controversial and substandard outlets. These will be their only source. So, instruction in history will be increasingly turned over to questionable YouTube channels and other internet sites. Popular media have an enormous influence on the public and shapes thinking, but a well formulated policy in humanities and social science teaching could counter that with researched material and critical thought. Another deplorable feature of the reforms lies in provisions encouraging students to move toward a career path too early in their student life.

The National Institute of Education has received quite a lot of flak in the fall out of the uproar over the controversial Grade 6 module. This is highlighted in a statement, different from the one already mentioned, released by influential members of the academic and activist public, which delivered a sharp critique of the NIE, even while welcoming the reforms (https://ceylontoday.lk/2026/01/16/academics-urge-govt-safeguard-integrity-of-education-reforms). The government itself suspended key players of the NIE in the reform process, following the mishap. The critique of NIE has been more or less uniform in our own discussions with interested members of the university community. It is interesting to note that both statements mentioned here have called for a review of the NIE and the setting up of a mechanism that will guide it in its activities at least in the interim period. The NIE is an educational arm of the state, and it is, ultimately, the responsibility of the government to oversee its function. It has to be equipped with qualified staff, provided with the capacity to initiate consultative mechanisms and involve panels of educators from various different fields and disciplines in policy and curriculum making.

In conclusion, I call upon the government to have courage and patience and to rethink some of the fundamental features of the reform. I reiterate the call for postponing the implementation of the reforms and, in the words of the statement of the 94 university teachers, “holistically review the new curriculum, including at primary level.”

(Sivamohan Sumathy was formerly attached to the University of Peradeniya)

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.

By Sivamohan Sumathy

Continue Reading

Features

Constitutional Council and the President’s Mandate

Published

on

A file photo of a Constitutional Council meeting

The Constitutional Council stands out as one of Sri Lanka’s most important governance mechanisms particularly at a time when even long‑established democracies are struggling with the dangers of executive overreach. Sri Lanka’s attempt to balance democratic mandate with independent oversight places it within a small but important group of constitutional arrangements that seek to protect the integrity of key state institutions without paralysing elected governments.  Democratic power must be exercised, but it must also be restrained by institutions that command broad confidence. In each case, performance has been uneven, but the underlying principle is shared.

 Comparable mechanisms exist in a number of democracies. In the United Kingdom, independent appointments commissions for the judiciary and civil service operate alongside ministerial authority, constraining but not eliminating political discretion. In Canada, parliamentary committees scrutinise appointments to oversight institutions such as the Auditor General, whose independence is regarded as essential to democratic accountability. In India, the collegium system for judicial appointments, in which senior judges of the Supreme Court play the decisive role in recommending appointments, emerged from a similar concern to insulate the judiciary from excessive political influence.

 The Constitutional Council in Sri Lanka  was developed to ensure that the highest level appointments to the most important institutions of the state would be the best possible under the circumstances. The objective was not to deny the executive its authority, but to ensure that those appointed would be independent, suitably qualified and not politically partisan. The Council is entrusted with oversight of appointments in seven critical areas of governance. These include the judiciary, through appointments to the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, the independent commissions overseeing elections, public service, police, human rights, bribery and corruption, and the office of the Auditor General.

JVP Advocacy

 The most outstanding feature of the Constitutional Council is its composition. Its ten members are drawn from the ranks of the government, the main opposition party, smaller parties and civil society. This plural composition was designed to reflect the diversity of political opinion in Parliament while also bringing in voices that are not directly tied to electoral competition. It reflects a belief that legitimacy in sensitive appointments comes not only from legal authority but also from inclusion and balance.

 The idea of the Constitutional Council was strongly promoted around the year 2000, during a period of intense debate about the concentration of power in the executive presidency. Civil society organisations, professional bodies and sections of the legal community championed the position that unchecked executive authority had led to abuse of power and declining public trust. The JVP, which is today the core part of the NPP government, was among the political advocates in making the argument and joined the government of President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga on this platform.

 The first version of the Constitutional Council came into being in 2001 with the 17th Amendment to the Constitution during the presidency of Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga. The Constitutional Council functioned with varying degrees of effectiveness. There were moments of cooperation and also moments of tension. On several occasions President Kumaratunga disagreed with the views of the Constitutional Council, leading to deadlock and delays in appointments. These experiences revealed both the strengths and weaknesses of the model.

 Since its inception in 2001, the Constitutional Council has had its ups and downs. Successive constitutional amendments have alternately weakened and strengthened it. The 18th Amendment significantly reduced its authority, restoring much of the appointment power to the executive. The 19th Amendment reversed this trend and re-established the Council with enhanced powers. The 20th Amendment again curtailed its role, while the 21st Amendment restored a measure of balance. At present, the Constitutional Council operates under the framework of the 21st Amendment, which reflects a renewed commitment to shared decision making in key appointments.

 Undermining Confidence

 The particular issue that has now come to the fore concerns the appointment of the Auditor General. This is a constitutionally protected position, reflecting the central role played by the Auditor General’s Department in monitoring public spending and safeguarding public resources. Without a credible and fearless audit institution, parliamentary oversight can become superficial and corruption flourishes unchecked. The role of the Auditor General’s Department is especially important in the present circumstances, when rooting out corruption is a stated priority of the government and a central element of the mandate it received from the electorate at the presidential and parliamentary elections held in 2024.

 So far, the government has taken hitherto unprecedented actions to investigate past corruption involving former government leaders. These actions have caused considerable discomfort among politicians now in the opposition and out of power.  However, a serious lacuna in the government’s anti-corruption arsenal is that the post of Auditor General has been vacant for over six months. No agreement has been reached between the government and the Constitutional Council on the nominations made by the President. On each of the four previous occasions, the nominees of the President have failed to obtain its concurrence.

 The President has once again nominated a senior officer of the Auditor General’s Department whose appointment was earlier declined by the Constitutional Council. The key difference on this occasion is that the composition of the Constitutional Council has changed. The three representatives from civil society are new appointees and may take a different view from their predecessors. The person appointed needs to be someone who is not compromised by long years of association with entrenched interests in the public service and politics. The task ahead for the new Auditor General is formidable. What is required is professional competence combined with moral courage and institutional independence.

 New Opportunity

 By submitting the same nominee to the Constitutional Council, the President is signaling a clear preference and calling it to reconsider its earlier decision in the light of changed circumstances. If the President’s nominee possesses the required professional qualifications, relevant experience, and no substantiated allegations against her, the presumption should lean toward approving the appointment. The Constitutional Council is intended to moderate the President’s authority and not nullify it.

 A consensual, collegial decision would be the best outcome. Confrontational postures may yield temporary political advantage, but they harm public institutions and erode trust. The President and the government carry the democratic mandate of the people; this mandate brings both authority and responsibility. The Constitutional Council plays a vital oversight role, but it does not possess an independent democratic mandate of its own and its legitimacy lies in balanced, principled decision making.

 Sri Lanka’s experience, like that of many democracies, shows that institutions function best when guided by restraint, mutual respect, and a shared commitment to the public good. The erosion of these values elsewhere in the world demonstrates their importance. At this critical moment, reaching a consensus that respects both the President’s mandate and the Constitutional Council’s oversight role would send a powerful message that constitutional governance in Sri Lanka can work as intended.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Gypsies … flying high

Published

on

The present setup

The scene has certainly changed for the Gypsies and today one could consider them as awesome crowd-pullers, with plenty of foreign tours, making up their itinerary.

With the demise of Sunil Perera, music lovers believed that the Gypsies would find the going tough in the music scene as he was their star, and, in fact, Sri Lanka’s number one entertainer/singer,

Even his brother Piyal Perera, who is now in charge of the Gypsies, admitted that after Sunil’s death he was in two minds about continuing with the band.

However, the scene started improving for the Gypsies, and then stepped in Shenal Nishshanka, in December 2022, and that was the turning point,

With Shenal in their lineup, Piyal then decided to continue with the Gypsies, but, he added, “I believe I should check out our progress in the scene…one year at a time.”

The original Gypsies: The five brothers Lal, Nimal, Sunil, Nihal and Piyal

They had success the following year, 2023, and then decided that they continue in 2024, as well, and more success followed.

The year 2025 opened up with plenty of action for the band, including several foreign assignments, and 2026 has already started on an awesome note, with a tour of Australia and New Zealand, which will keep the Gypsies in that part of the world, from February to March.

Shenal has already turned out to be a great crowd puller, and music lovers in Australia and New Zealand can look forward to some top class entertainment from both Shenal and Piyal.

Piyal, who was not much in the spotlight when Sunil was in the scene, is now very much upfront, supporting Shenal, and they do an awesome job on stage … keeping the audience entertained.

Shenal is, in fact, a rocker, who plays the guitar, and is extremely creative on stage with his baila.

‘Api Denna’ Piyal and Shenal

Piyal and Shenal also move into action as a duo ‘Api Denna’ and have even done their duo scene abroad.

Piyal mentioned that the Gypsies will feature a female vocalist during their tour of New Zealand.

“With Monique Wille’s departure from the band, we now operate without a female vocalist, but if a female vocalist is required for certain events, we get a solo female singer involved, as a guest artiste. She does her own thing and we back her, and New Zealand requested for a female vocalist and Dilmi will be doing the needful for us,” said Piyal.

According to Piyal, he originally had plans to end the Gypsies in the year 2027 but with the demand for the Gypsies at a very high level now those plans may not work out, he says.

Continue Reading

Trending